The previous post I was looking at both the Denon 3805 & Yamaha rv x2500 for HT use and someone got me looking at the Pioneer Elite Receiver 56TXi for HT use. Did some rechearch and like what I saw. What is the opinions of experts out there? Thanks for your input. DixLon
Don't have the 56, but I have the 54. I love it. Plenty of power, "warm" sound, user friendly remote, Bi-amping my front speakers was a breeze, MCACC easy to set-up and sounds great. I like the beefiness of MOSfet amplification, and the capacitors on the 56 are larger than those on the 2500 and the 3805.
I wanted the 56 for the USB and the Firewire/i.link, but couldn't afford it. If you can hold off for a couple of weeks, you may be able to pick up the new vsx-74 which I think is the replacement for the 56.
T2T
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Pioneer Elites do great with theater. Not as good for music, though. If you're thinking of using the receiver for more music down the road, consider some of the other choices for receivers.
anonymousII
Unregistered guest
Posted on
I do not agree that Elite's "are not as good for music" etc. Compared to what? I have owned a Elite 45 for two and a half years and have always felt it was better for music that HT. I listen to a lot of music and never feel I am missing anything. I like the combination of warmth and detail that this receiver delivers. I have heard many other brands and owned many others and for my needs I have found nothing I like better overall. I have specific needs for my system [like we all do] and of the brands that I can consider the Elite's fit my needs the best. When I bought mine I spent some time listening to it and the universally highly regarded Marantz 7300ose and liked them both and as before didn't feel the Elite lacked in any way. As always one should listen to as many receivers as possible before buying as their are many fine units in the mid priced area to choose from.
T2T
Unregistered guest
Posted on
"I do not agree that Elite's "are not as good for music" etc. Compared to what?"
Compared to lots of other receivers. Take H/K for example. While I'm not a H/K fanboy, I do own one of their lower end receivers. However, with music, it still performs better than the Elite.
I've owned lots of receivers. Let's see - about 9 or 10 in the past 4 years.
I will agree, though, that one should thorougly listen to as many receivers as possible before making a purchase.
Anoni
Unregistered guest
Posted on
T2T, You deaf
anonymousII
Unregistered guest
Posted on
9 or 10 receivers in the past 4 years huh? Maybe you don't know what you like then. That's a heck of a lot of receivers in such a short time. After that many and you settle for a lower end HK. HK's are good receivers and I would not criticize them sonically but a lower end HK does not sound better with music than a upper level Elite. I have heard them all. It's too bad that HK like Marantz has abandoned their long time base of fans of my age group who have an extensive LP collections and no longer include a phone stage in their receivers. These two brands especially were staples of the industry when I first got into this hobby some 30 years ago. HK is very limited in their input package and even the excellent 7300 has only six . Nowhere near enough for a receiver of that price and vintage. I know, this is the digital age and all that but for those of use who grow up with these two brands it's a real letdown to not have a phono input. That is one thing about my Elite I really like and appreciate. It has a very good phone stage, much better than any previous receiver I have owned. I don't use it a lot but it's there when I need it. Elite, HK and Marantz all sound very similar to me,all on the warm side. That's what I prefer and any one would be a good choice for most anyone based on their system need. I can't say one sounds better than the other overall.
I have disagree with you on the Marantz sounding warm. It is very neutral in my opinion, which is what I like in a receiver. The original post though, is about the Pioneer 56. I believe Tweeter is having a sale on them right now, and for Ht it is a good buy at the lower price. They look great, and do Htreally well. The 54 is not bad either, and I think it was less than 500.
anonymousII
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Herman, I understand your point about Marantz and of the three brands it is probably the closest to neutral. One thing for sure is that Marantz receivers are not bright and that's good. I wish they'd include a phono input and another input or two and I'd probably own one. They also need to do something about their poor remotes. Sonically they leave nothing to be desired in my opinion.